Expand chart
Note: 1800–1900 data shown at 25-year intervals, 1900–1920 & 1930–1970 data shown at 10-year intervals, and 1920–1930 & 1970–2015 data shown at 5-year intervals. Data: Arnulf Grubler (2008), International Energy Agency (2017). Reproduced from charts by Richard Newell and Daniel Raimi. Chart: Axios Visuals

Since 2010, the costs of producing electricity from solar photovoltaic systems have decreased by more than 80%. Wind and solar now vie with natural gas to provide new electricity generating capacity. To some, these trends signal the world’s latest energy transition: away from fossil fuels and toward a renewable future.

The big picture: These historical changes in the energy system, however, have been a matter of addition, not transition. Although the percentage shares of biomass, coal and oil in our energy supply have fallen with the rise of alternatives, their total use continues to grow. The world has never experienced an energy transition, but the challenge of climate change means that, for the first time, one will need to begin.

Since 1800 biomass consumption has increased by about 275%, and coal use by more than 60% just since 2000. Rapidly falling costs and growing investments have helped boost wind and solar power, but these energy sources — like nuclear, oil, and gas before them — are building on top of old ones, rather than replacing them.

A true energy transition will need to reduce carbon emissions. By 2040, the International Energy Agency projects that, to reach the climate targets laid out in the Paris Agreement, global coal consumption would need to decline by more than half while oil consumption falls by almost 25%. Natural gas could continue to grow, though more slowly than today. Renewables would need to increase roughly tenfold from today’s levels to provide, together with nuclear, more than 25% of global energy.

Economists have consistently identified the policies to achieve such a transition: a price on greenhouse gas emissions, coupled with incentives for early-stage research and new technology development, including advanced solar, nuclear and carbon capture technologies.

Yes, but: While some major emitters are adopting these policies, they are mostly falling short of the goals outlined in Paris, and new investments in fossil fuels continue to more than double those in renewables. Meanwhile, federal policy in the U.S. is moving in the opposite direction. And even with ideal policies, a real energy transition would mean winners and losers, creating substantial challenges for regions reliant on the production, transformation and consumption of fossil fuels.

The bottom line: To avoid the worst impacts of climate change, renewables and new technologies will need to do more than build atop CO2–intensive fossil fuels — they will need to push out incumbents while at the same time expanding global energy access and reducing the system’s environmental footprint.

Richard Newell is president and CEO of Resources for the Future. Daniel Raimi is a senior research associate in RFF’s Energy and Climate Program.

Go deeper

The CIA's new license to cyberattack

Illustration: Aïda Amer/Axios

In 2018 President Trump granted the Central Intelligence Agency expansive legal authorities to carry out covert actions in cyberspace, providing the agency with powers it has sought since the George W. Bush administration, former U.S. officials directly familiar with the matter told Yahoo News.

Why it matters: The CIA has conducted disruptive covert cyber operations against Iran and Russia since the signing of this presidential finding, said former officials.

2 hours ago - Technology

Tech hits the brakes on office reopenings

Illustration: Annelise Capossela/Axios

Tech was the first industry to send its workers home when COVID-19 first hit the U.S., and it has been among the most cautious in bringing workers back. Even still, many companies are realizing that their reopening plans from as recently as a few weeks ago are now too optimistic.

Why it matters: Crafting reopening plans gave tech firms a chance to bolster their leadership and model the beginnings of a path back to normalcy for other office workers. Their decision to pause those plans is the latest sign that normalcy is likely to remain elusive in the U.S.

The existential threat to small business

Illustration: Eniola Odetunde/Axios

The coronavirus pandemic has changed the game for U.S. businesses, pushing forward years-long shifts in workplaces, technology and buying habits and forcing small businesses to fight just to survive.

Why it matters: These changes are providing an almost insurmountable advantage to big companies, which are positioned to come out of the recession stronger and with greater market share than ever.